Sheena Malhotra
|
Speedy deletion nomination of Darshan Academy edit
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Darshan Academy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mean as custard (talk) 18:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Response edit
Thank for you the comment! Keep up the great work. Red Director (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Where is the school situated?Xx236 (talk) 10:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- The School, Darshan Academy is situated in 20 cities of India and a city of Columbia(Cali) check http://www.darshanacademy.org/--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 10:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Please explain it in the page. Xx236 (talk) 10:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, sure. Thanks for your suggestion.--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Please explain it in the page. Xx236 (talk) 10:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Darshan Academy edit
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Darshan Academy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mean as custard (talk) 11:03, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Reply edit
Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because
- it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the school, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the school claims or interviewing its management. You gave many references, and the Hindu is generally accepted, with some misgivings, as a reliable source. However, the fact that you have 12 references to support one sentence The school aims at providing holistic development by imparting the knowledge of body mind and soul gives the game away, you collect random activities and deduce that, so not a fact, just WP:OR by synthesis. Apart from the number of branches the academy claims, we know nothing. Nothing about numbers of students or staff, where the campuses are, subjects studied, education achievements or ages of the studenst
- it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, but all we got was a motto, a synthesised list of aims, a link to the academy, and no facts. Obviously intended to promote the school instead of imparting knowledge.
- If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your school is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also guidance for editors with conflicts of interest and writing about yourself.
- If you work directly or indirectly for the school, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Sheena Malhotra. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sheena Malhotra|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.
Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read this important guidance. You must also reply to the COI request above
@Espresso Addict: for info Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:29, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thank You for telling me my mistakes and for your valuable advice. I will keep this in mind the next time.--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 19:39, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Image without license edit
Unspecified source/license for File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 15:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks alot for your inputs, I will add on the details.--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 18:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Please attribute or claim media you uploaded or restored: File:Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Image.jpg edit
You uploaded or restored , File:Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Image.jpg, but for various reasons did not add an {{information}} block, or indicate your (user) name on the file description page. Media uploaded to Wikipedia needs information on the SPECIFIC authorship and source of files, to ensure that it complies with copyright laws in various jurisdictions.
If it's entirely your own work, please include {{own}} in the relevant source field, amend the {{information}} added by a third party, ensuring that your user name (or name you want used for attribution) is clear in the author field, and change the license to an appropriate "self" variant (if such a license is not already used). You should also add an |author= parameter to the license tag, to assist reviews and image patrollers. You can also add |claimed=yes and an |author=to the {{media by uploader}} or {{presumed_self}} tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).
If it's not entirely your own work, then please update the source and authorship fields, so that they accurately reflect the source and authors of the original work(s), as well as the derivative you created. You should also not use a "self" license unless the work is entirely you own. Media that is incorrectly claimed as self or {{own}}, will eventually be listed at Files for Discussion or deleted, unless it's full status is entirely clear to other contributors, reviewers and image patrollers.
Whilst this notification, relates to a single media upload, it would also be appreciated if you could ensure that appropriate attribution exists for other media you uploaded, You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
It's okay to remove or strike this message once the issue has been resolved :).
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:21, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
File:Darshan Academy Logo.jpg listed for discussion edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Darshan Academy Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:23, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg listed for discussion edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 7 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Science of Spirituality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lisle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 2 edit
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sawan Kirpal Ruhani Mission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IIT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading File:Science of Spirituality Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of TO THE NEW edit
Hello Sheena Malhotra,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TO THE NEW for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Nomination of TO THE NEW for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TO THE NEW is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TO THE NEW until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lapablo (talk) 21:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Request to Unblock edit
Sheena Malhotra (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
- @Bbb23:, @GeneralizationsAreBad:, I kindly request Wikipedia administrators to unblock me because neither am I linked withEchoes 2009, nor have I ever operated that account. I do not know that person and we are definitely not socks and I am not engaged in any sort of meat puppeting. I understand that we might have fallen in the same geographical span thus leading to same IP Range but I do not know Echoes 2009 and thus my account must be unblocked.sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This is not believable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Sheena Malhotra (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
@NinjaRobotPirate:, This might seem unbelievable to you but I stand firm on the point that I am not operating multiple accounts; so, you are very kindly requested to unblock me and if required, my account and edits can be monitored closely and block can be reapplied if any act which tends to disrespect Wikipedia's policies is made. I intend to work very sincerely with Wikipedia's policies and request you to please reconsider this request as I am not engaged in any abusive activity of operating multiple accounts. --sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 08:55, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Behavioural and/or technical evidence strongly suggests that this account is a sockpuppet. Simple denial is not considered a sufficient reason to unblock the account. In order to be unblocked, you will need to convince the reviewing administrator that there is a better explanation for this apparent connection than the abuse of multiple accounts. Yunshui 雲水 10:37, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
decline July 4, 2019 edit
Sheena Malhotra (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi @Yunshui:, This is in accordance with your decline to my request. I would seek your help to figure out what evidence do you think are required to convince the administrator to unblock me. Please do reply with some suggestions. Secondly, I please request you to limit my block to some time period. I don't understand why I have been blocked indefinitely. I am quite serious about working on Wikipedia in accordance with all its policies. Please limit my block to some time period so that I can work again. I was not involved in operating multiple accounts and would seek your help to let me prove so. I promise to do everything with the utmost professionalism and keeping in mind the security concerns so that no abusive activity is done through this IP address.--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 10:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm sorry, I cannot unblock you at this time. You might want to consider the WP:standard offer. However, as this is a WP:sock block, please reread the pertinent portions of the WP:GAB. Perhaps that will be helpful. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
PS The overlap suggests the possibility of WP:UPE. I apologize if this is not the case, but that is what I infer. Please read and heed WP:COI and WP:PAID. I think it best if any unblock condition require a WP:TBAN on TO THE NEW, broadly construed. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Request to Unblock edit
Sheena Malhotra (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi @Yunshui:, @ Deepfriedokra:! It has been over 6 months that I have been blocked indefinitely and meanwhile no abusive activity has taken place from this IP Address. I understand and respect Wikipedia's security policies and I am very serious about working on Wikipedia in accordance with all its policies. I request you to unblock me or at least please limit my block to some time period so that I can work again. I understand my fault and guarantee that it won't be taken up again. I promise to do everything with the utmost professionalism. sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 08:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Funny how the account mentioned below also tried to create an article about a startup based in Noida, India. I'd like to see an explanation. MER-C 19:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
CU note for reviewing admin: the static IP address used to make this appeal is also in use by User:XYZ182 (although apparently on a different device). Yunshui 雲水 09:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Request To Unblock edit
Sheena Malhotra (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi @Yunshui:, @ Deepfriedokra:!, @MER-C:! It has been over a year (15 Months) that I have been blocked indefinitely and meanwhile, no abusive activity has taken place from this IP Address.
I understand and respect Wikipedia's security policies and I am very serious about working on Wikipedia in accordance with all its policies.
I request you to unblock me or at least please limit my block to some time period so that I can work again. I understand my fault and guarantee that it won't be taken up again. I promise to do everything with the utmost professionalism.
I assure you that none of my previous mistakes will be repeated. I have used the duration of this block to understand the policies of Wikipedia in a better way. Please grant me a chance to reflect the same in my work.--sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Back in January you said "no abusive activity has taken place from this IP Address" while you were using another account. Why should we believe you now when you're saying the same thing in September and NOW admit that you were using the IP abusively in January? only (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- Above it was pointed out that another account was on the same IP creating similar material. Was that you? only (talk) 22:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it was me but it was an honest mistake as I was under the misconception that only my account was blocked and that I could start afresh (following all Wikipedia policies) with a new account. It was after that when I realized that my IP is blocked.
- I was no way trying to misuse or disrespect the policies. It was a gap in my understanding.
- I understand that now and I am requesting that my IP should be unblocked. I really want to work on Wikipedia with sincerity. --sheenamalhotra182 (talk) 22:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
September 2020 edit
(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.